Sorry I have sort of fallen behind on commenting lately (real life has a way of getting busy at times), but here are some of my quick thoughts on the teams I’ve missed:

San Diego A’s: I would’ve personally preferred powder blue, and the font is a bit tough to get used to at first, but now I see that it shares some resemblance to the ‘04 Padres rebrand font.

Kansas City A’s: Absolutely classic set. I adore the main home & away sets. Now that I look at it, the home reminds me a lot of the Padres 2016 home uniform.

Kansas City Blues: Beautiful use of the two blues. Every single uniform/logo is great, though I wouldn’t expect any less from you. The sublte music note in the wordmarks & logos is a particularly great touch.

Kansas City Monarchs: Yet another gorgeous set of uniforms. Each option is fantastic, but I find myself really loving the alternates. Purple & athletic gold is simply one of the best schemes out there.

Milwaukee White Sox: The Germanic colors for the Sox is just a genius idea. Such a great set. I don’t have much else I could say about it.

Washington Senators Mk. I: Beautiful. As @Paul Lucas said, this would be a great set for the Nationals too, though I might honestly like the name “Senators” a bit better. Does the away have a slight blue tint to it? Either way, it looks great.

Senators Mk. II: This is definitely a 90’s look, and you were able to mesh navy/red/gold about as best you could. I really like the custom font.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Thanks! I think I might do a full kelly/yellow/red set at the end of the series, once I figure it out on the alternates. You can bet that the Chicago A's/Seattle White Sox will happen (as will several more A's and White Sox relocation attempts).

I had been looking forward to doing this one from the start of the series, if only because of the different ways I could transpose the A's look onto Texas. This one has a bit more than rumor or periodical reports, but rather a rejected relocation vote. Per articles from The Hardball Times and Royals Review, Charlie O. Finley was fed up with Kansas City for a variety of reasons (the AFL Chiefs' preferential treatment, poor attendance, and lease negotiations).1 He wanted to move the team as early as 1962, only two years after purchasing the club from Arnold Johnson's estate. His desired location was the Dallas-Fort Worth area, but the other AL owners denied the move in late 1962. One could sum up Finley's Texas venture with this .gif:

However, what if the AL owners saw the potential for growth within the market, and allowed Charlie O. to move there?

The club would debut at the Cotton Bowl in Dallas (which totally had a baseball configuration, BTW - no idea about dimensions)2 in 1963, before the construction of Turnpike Stadium in Arlington (which would be less dumpy, given that it wouldn't be built on speculation). Charlie O. would debut his trademark Kelly Green, Tulane Gold, & Wedding Gown White (with white cleats) brand in Dallas, immediately setting the squad apart from their staid AF Kansas City uniforms. The Swingin' A's dynasty would cement the identity in Texas, much like it did in Oakland. While later owners darkened the green (for a more "old west" style), resurrected Connie Mack's white elephant (perfect for post-Southern Strategy Texas) and added a few "western" touches, the team still drew inspiration from Finley's aesthetic.

Side note: I did consider going for a royal/red, navy/red, or royal/silver color scheme (for post-Charlie O. baseball), but I decided against it. If the NHL Stars could retain green (despite trying to ditch it - glad they didn't), then so could the A's with presumably even more competitive success.3

The primary logo features the A's 1994-2002 Spring Training logo, albeit without the sun and with the addition of a gold cowboy hat showing the "A's" insignia. I figured it was a way to "Dallas-ify" the logo a bit. It's in a roundel, featuring the Kansas University'sclassic Tiffany lettering and a yellow-white split. The secondaries include both "A's" and a "DA" mark. I opted to go for a "DA" one, because an Old English D is too Tigers for me. The tertiary is the elephant on its own.

The alternates feature the "A's" crest, with the gold jersey exhibiting double striping with collar trim. The green alternate features the "DA" cap and the primary on the sleeve. I also opted for no outlines, as outlines just clutter upthe look.

I opted to include two Kelly Green-era uniforms, styled after the A's 1968-69 vests. The white option uses a "DALLAS" wordmark in the style of the 1968 Oakland uniforms, while the gold set is pretty much the 1964-1969 design. The cap logo uses the 1968-69 insignia. I added a patch that mixes the A's 1968-70 primary, a Texas outline (with a star over Dallas/Arlington), and a yellow base (like the 1971-81 primary design).

The main dugout jacket uses a one-color version of the home script, with the cap logo on the side and the primary on the back. The throwback jacket is an update of this design, with the addition of the sleeve patch.

All in all, the team's identity translates well to Dallas with the color scheme and marks adapting well to the Texan setting (without going overboard). C+C is appreciated, as always!

Those are nice Dallas Athletics. I would think, however, that if Mr. Finley had moved the team to the Dallas-Ft. Worth suburb of Arlington, I believe he would have named the team the Texas Athletics, in order to encompass the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex. The caps would have had an Old English "T" instead of the "DA" that you have on your caps.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Hey guys, sorry about the hiatus. A mix of real-life and a bit of a creative burnout put the brakes on this series. Don't worry, a new entry is coming within the day!

On 9/26/2018 at 9:37 AM, coco1997 said:

No one can argue that this concept doesn't look like it's straight out of the '90s. It's very easy to imagine this design giving way to the Nats' inaugural look.

On 9/26/2018 at 11:34 AM, Dalcowboyfan92 said:

This Sens set just oozes 90s. Especially the two-toned gradiant dugout jackets.

Thanks, guys!

On 9/26/2018 at 12:51 PM, neo_prankster said:

By 1999, do these Senators hop on the Turn Ahead the Clock bandwagon?

Why yest they do! The first option is a sedate version, while the second is a bit more "experimental" (e.g., sticking more to the spirit than the lazy click-n-fill common to the promotion).

The font is Badloc, used by several of the TATC teams. I like it more than Serpentine.

On 9/26/2018 at 12:59 PM, the admiral said:

The Rangers-inspired primary is interesting. I always like alternate-universe stuff where the same ideas of today are arrived at in different ways. Took me a while to get used to the scripts and how gold seems like the primary color by being the interior one, but is outnumbered by red and blue, as well as gold being a primary color at all, but I came to understand it as experimental '90s design. I wonder whether they would have added an extraneous black drop shadow.

Thanks! I originally wanted to bring out a slate/black/bronze set, but I figured that the team wouldn't have changed their color scheme wholesale (being in a traditional baseball market). However, like the 1990s Rangers, redistribution of existing colors made more sense. Black drop shadow, while era-appropriate, looks like clown feces (like it did for the Rangers).

On 9/28/2018 at 1:43 PM, NicDB said:

That Tuscan Brewers set is a gem! As is the last droptail set.

Any chance we might see those in with blue scripts and numbers?

Thank you. I had a lot of fun reconstructing the prototypes. Blue with yellow outlines on the road uniforms looks lovely, while also separating them from the Pilots a bit more.

On 9/29/2018 at 12:05 AM, MJD7 said:

Sorry I have sort of fallen behind on commenting lately (real life has a way of getting busy at times), but here are some of my quick thoughts on the teams I’ve missed:

San Diego A’s: I would’ve personally preferred powder blue, and the font is a bit tough to get used to at first, but now I see that it shares some resemblance to the ‘04 Padres rebrand font.

Kansas City A’s: Absolutely classic set. I adore the main home & away sets. Now that I look at it, the home reminds me a lot of the Padres 2016 home uniform.

Kansas City Blues: Beautiful use of the two blues. Every single uniform/logo is great, though I wouldn’t expect any less from you. The sublte music note in the wordmarks & logos is a particularly great touch.

Kansas City Monarchs: Yet another gorgeous set of uniforms. Each option is fantastic, but I find myself really loving the alternates. Purple & athletic gold is simply one of the best schemes out there.

Milwaukee White Sox: The Germanic colors for the Sox is just a genius idea. Such a great set. I don’t have much else I could say about it.

Washington Senators Mk. I: Beautiful. As @Paul Lucas said, this would be a great set for the Nationals too, though I might honestly like the name “Senators” a bit better. Does the away have a slight blue tint to it? Either way, it looks great.

Senators Mk. II: This is definitely a 90’s look, and you were able to mesh navy/red/gold about as best you could. I really like the custom font.

Overall, great work as usual, some of this might be your best yet!

Thank you very much!

On 10/1/2018 at 6:16 PM, Jaybird said:

Those are nice Dallas Athletics. I would think, however, that if Mr. Finley had moved the team to the Dallas-Ft. Worth suburb of Arlington, I believe he would have named the team the Texas Athletics, in order to encompass the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex. The caps would have had an Old English "T" instead of the "DA" that you have on your caps.

Could you do one with the Texas Athletics?

Thanks. I doubt that Finley would have adopted the state name, since he's not naming the team after a state organization. He never tried to adopt a state name in his various moving proposals, so I ruled out that option. I also dislike state names, so I wouldn't have a team adopt one outside of certain circumstances (e.g., Minnesota teams and the upcoming Carolina Twins). I'll get around to the Texas Athletics at some point later in the series.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

This one was a bit of a rabbit hole to climb down, but it produced some fascinating results. It's been widely reported that the San Diego Padres almost moved to DC in the 1973-74 offseason. Owner C. Arnholt Smith was looking to sell the team due to financial struggles and in anticipation of the IRS charging him for tax fraud. Joseph Danzansky, President of Giant Foods, made an offer to buy the Padres for $12 million and move them to DC. The move was nearly successful, with the NL unanimously approving it and Topps designing their 1974 set with it in mind:

The team even developed a road uniform that fit with the stylistic conventions of the early/mid-1970s while also replacing the brown & yellow banana set with a traditional navy & red:1

However, it was not meant to be, as the team would have to pay off the hefty amount of money left on their San Diego Stadium lease (15 years' worth).2 Couple that with an $84 million lawsuit from the city for breaking the said lease, and you've got a problem. The sale fell through, which allowed Ray "The Founder" Kroc to buy the Padres and keep them in San Diego. However, what if the relocation went through and Washington got a new team? How would their appearance change as they chased trends and updated their look upon moving to the Navy Yard Stadium?

Going off of this Washington Post article from 2016, I figured that the most likely name for the team would have been "Nationals."3 I could only find one source for the "Stars" name that's been often reported by historians (based on a guess made by Ebbets Field Flannels' Jerry Cohen).4 Danzansky's son and Peter Bavasi cited the "Nationals" name as the leading candidate, so it seemed the best idea and more distinct than "Stars." Their colors would still be navy & red, and unlike the modern Padres, navy & red wouldn't be an issue.

The basic structure of this design is that of the 2004-2011 San Diego Padres. with a few cues from the 2005-2010 Nationals thrown in. Drop shadow would only appear on white and grey backgrounds, with navy backgrounds featuring basic outlines (and some allusions to the shadow split in the star/letter design). The Astros' 2013-present block font is the base, as a modern block style that fits with the prototype and the modernish font I call Petcopark.ttf. The primary logo uses a home plate backing (Padres) with a new take on the three-star pattern of the DC flag. The secondary is my modernization/de-North Starized version of the prototype cap logo, while the tertiary is an update of a supposed Sen(ationals)itors design.

The uniforms borrow from the Padres' 2004-2011 set, with some adaptations for navy/red. A cursive script is on the home uniform, complete with an inverted tail. I used the 2005-2009 Nats' arching pattern on the road uniform, which is my way of mimicking the bowtie wordmark. The numbers are double outlined block standard, a la the 1991-2003 Padres. I added a sock stripe pattern meant to mimic the asymmetrical pattern on the sleeves and pants (no red/navy touching).

The navy alternate sheds the drop shadow and adds the tertiary patch, akin to the Padres' old navy alt. A fauxback to the 1974 uniforms is the second alt, with an appropriate cap and an adjustment to the sleeve patch. I based the script off of the 1974-77 home look, which fits well with the "cursive/fancy at home, block on road" pattern used by the Padres throughout their history.

The primary dugout jacket features the cap logo on the front and the primary on the back (with the tertiary on the sleeve), while the fauxback utilizes the prototype's "Washington" wordmark.

It was surprising how well the Padres' formula worked for the Nats. While I would never want the current team to adopt anything that resembled this set, I liked dissecting the 2004-2011 Padres' identity and figuring out what made it work. C+C is appreciated, as always!

Up next, a funny little twist!

1 Author's Note: When we say we want the Padres to bring back brown & yellow, the 1972-73 banana peels aren't an option.

This was one of the surprises in researching for this series. The year is 1975. John Allyn, the owner of the White Sox, was looking to sell the team. He planned to sell them to a Seattle-based ownership group, who would move the team to the near-complete Kingdome. As part of the deal, Charlie O. Finley would move the A's to Chicago to occupy Comiskey Park (the AL didn't want to abandon Chicago). However, the deal fell through when Bill Veeck came in and bought the White Sox from Allyn.1 However, what if the deal went through?

The article I cited claimed the Athletics would adopt the White Sox MK II, while the White Sox MK I would adopt a new brand. However, I saw the AL stepping in to prevent the rebranding. The A's had just won three World Series (which makes their move seem weird, but again, Charlie O. was a douchecanoe of a medium order), so their brand would be too "hot" to throw away. While the White Sox may have changed their name upon moving, I couldn't see a legacy organization change names for no good reason.2 However, their branding would be somewhat different from the current Sox.

I went with the assumption that the Jerry Reinsdorf would have bought the A's in the '80s and redesigned them with a more sedate/classy look in 1990/91 for the opening of New Comiskey. The Seattle White Sox would follow a similar branding course to the Mariners, with a purchase by Nintendo leading to a redesign in 1993 that incorporated teal and a "fancy" font (albeit with some adjustments for the Safeco Field move). Both teams would find success in these new designs and keep them around, akin to their modern counterparts.

CHICAGO ATHLETICS

I figured the best way to make the A's more classy/sedate would be to adopt a forest green/white color scheme and the elephant logo (from my Philly A's concept). The "apostrophe s" would leave the insignia, while the team name script would only appear in wordmark form (and on the jacket). Kelly/Yellow would be reserved for the throwback/"Halfway to St. Patrick's Day." Also, thanks to @coco1997 for pointing out the error in the original image. The creme outline on the wordmark is now white.

I reasoned that the team would adopt dark green pinstripes, as a way to differentiate themselves from the Tigers. The road set features the White Sox's "Chicago " script, as I'm sure it would've turned up at some point. It also has thick knit trim, being an early-90s design. The numbers are all Block Standard, akin to the current team.

The alts include a green softball top and a recreation of the 1975/76 uniforms (their first Chicago set). I thought it'd be weird to have a Philly A's set, if only because the White Sox and A's were rivals at that point.

The home dugout jacket features the team name script, along with the elephant/road script on the back. The throwback jacket has striping that matches the jersey sleeves.

SEATTLE WHITE SOX

The primary logo is my attempt to merge the current "Sox" insignia with the modified version of Badger Light I used on my Project 32Marinersconcept. It's a good way to "Seattle-ify" their 1990 redesign. I also borrowed the teal shade from my Mariners design, pairing it with navy in a co-dominant color scheme. I also used the 1990-present sock logo as a secondary. A navy/kelly version of the Sox's 1976-90 primary logo is a throwback tertiary mark. I figured that the team would consult the same design firm they did in 1976, producing a similar design with the same overused to the point of irritation "modern" Eurostile Extended Black font.

The uniforms combine several White Sox and Mariners traits. The "Sox" insignia is on the home uniform, while the arc-ed "Seattle" wordmark appears on the road uniform (the White Sox have rarely used arched wordmarks, preferring to put "Chicago" on an arc). Block Standard numbers and Rawlings Block NoB's appear on the set, along with the sock patch and simple placket trim. I opted to use teal bills on the cap, as I've always loved that Mariners cap. The socks are the same "dark upper, light middle, white lower" pattern I'm so fond of using on White Sox concepts.

The alternates have a Mariners bent to them, with a teal jersey and a navy one. The navy jersey has an all-navy cap, as the jersey features only a tiny bit of teal.

The second set of alts includes a teal-crowned cap and a Seattle-ified version of the "winning ugly" duds. I replaced the striping with a Northwestern Stripe pattern with navy and kelly, while also using a navy/white/kelly pattern on the collars and pants. There are now white socks with the sleeve/chest stripe on them, alongside green sanitaries and shoes. I figured that the modern look would be better suited for the Kingdome than Old Comiskey, while also fulfilling the whole "similar conclusion through different methods" philosophy of this thread.

The jackets have a few fun features. The primaries have a "White Sox" wordmark and striped white sleeves, while the throwback has the "SOX batterman" on the chest.

This was one of the stranger proposals I've encountered in the thread, but it produced some fun variations on classic designs and hybrids of early-1990s redesigns. I'm glad it didn't happen, but it was fascinating to see how both teams could have maintained the spirit of their identities while also incorporating local influences. C+C is appreciated, as always!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Seattle White Sox are easily my favorite team of the series so far! I think I like them even more than the Milwaukee version. Everything works so well here. If the Sox ever chose to modernize their current "Sox" logo, the primary would be the perfect way to to go. The throwback set is excellent as well--kelly green and navy look fantastic together, and the thin striping on the "license plate" jersey is a really nice idea.

The Chicago A's have a strong look. One question--Any reason "CHICAGO" in the wordmark is outlined in cream/off-white?

Link to post

Share on other sites

Thanks! It was a bit tough trying to get the drop shadow just right, especially on the "WashingtoN" wordmark. I'm sure something like that was a consideration during the branding process, along w/ Todd Radom's successful design (minus his "bevel block W," because Bud/the city fathers preferred the Cooperstown Collection red cap with the Curly W. It must be odd to have such a hard-on for one winning season amidst a pile of refuse.

The Seattle White Sox are easily my favorite team of the series so far! I think I like them even more than the Milwaukee version. Everything works so well here. If the Sox ever chose to modernize their current "Sox" logo, the primary would be the perfect way to to go. The throwback set is excellent as well--kelly green and navy look fantastic together, and the thin striping on the "license plate" jersey is a really nice idea.

The Chicago A's have a strong look. One question--Any reason "CHICAGO" in the wordmark is outlined in cream/off-white?

Thank you. I really liked designing the new "Sox" logo and repurposing the font. New Historicism is a good way to explain the philosophy here, with certain designs emerging through a specific set of historical circumstances at different times. I've corrected the logo sheet on the Chicago A's, as the off-white outline was an error.

On 10/12/2018 at 4:04 PM, BellaSpurs said:

Chicago is phenomal, my favorite so far, not the biggest fan of the Sox logo, prefer the throwback you made, maybe try that in teal?

Thanks! I can see why the "Sox" logo would be a little odd, but I'm not about to use the throwback on the main design. They don't gel well together.

It's time for a slightly upsetting relocation for me!

TORONTO GIANTS - Penumbra for my pain

This one is doubly awful for me. It not only involves my hometown team moving, but it would also mean that one of my favorite identities in sports, the modern Blue Jays, wouldn't exist. Putting aside my feelings, let's see how it'd turn out!

The year is 1975. Toronto was looking to enter into MLB, with fellows like Toronto Chairman Paul Godfrey and Labatt Breweries' Don McDougall leading the campaign.1 This group reached out to the San Francisco Giants, who had fallen on hard times following the success of the 1960s. Candlestick Park'smany problems were rearing their ugly head, attendance and team performance declined, and owner Horace Stoneham was losing considerable amounts of cash.2 The Toronto group made an offer in early 1976 to Stoneham's National Exhibition Company for $13,250,000, $8 million for the team and $5.25 to cover the Candlestick lease. However, new SF mayor George Moscone asked for a temporary injunction to stop the sale, allowing a local ownership group led by Bob Lurie (and temporarily featuring Bob Short of the Sens/Rangers) to buy the team for $8 million at the deadline. The NL approved the deal and the Giants stayed put.3 The Labatt group would eventually get the Blue Jays from the AL expansion later that year. However, what if the injunction failed/wasn't asked for, and the sale went through?

The home and road uniforms are the perfect blend of both Giants and Jays, with the Jays' knit trim and Penumbra font rendered in the Giants' black/orange colorway. The orange/black/orange stripe appears on the socks, while the primary occupies the sleeve. The number font is the Maple Leafs' 1967 throwback font, as I felt the Giants should stick with a simple varsity block design.

The alternates include an orange and black jersey for home and road, respectively. The home alt features an orange-billed cap, while the road uses the tertiary as a sleeve patch.

The second set of alternates includes a red/white Canada Day alternate for July 1 home games, as well as a "What If?" design of the 1976 rebrand. I opted to mimic the 1977 Blue Jays' home uniform template for this design while tracing William Henderson's recreation of the Giants' trashy 1983-99 number font for the uniforms.4 It worked well with the prototype's Helvetica Black wordmark.

While I find the idea of the Toronto Giants to be an affront on several levels, I still think that the team could have emerged with an excellent design that reflected their new location. Heck, the existence of an NL team in Toronto may have prolonged the Expos' existence or ensured a different outcome for the AL's Seattle problem/1977 expansion partner. This won't be the last time we see the Giants here, as Labatt's Doug McDougall said:

Quote

“Changing ownership is not going to put people in the ballpark and it’s not going to pay the bills.”5

We'll see how that plays out shortly.

Addendum: I've used this screencap from the documentary What If: The Unlikely Story of Toronto's Baseball Giants and assorted images (liked in my explanation/mini-report above) to trace the prototype logo, complete with estimate Pantone values:

Click the image for a high-resolution version. I wanted to get the logo out there in the digital space, so it's a bit less rabbit hole-y to find it. Also, I can't recommend the What If documentary enough. It's got some fantastic interviews with a lot of the figures involved in the attempted relocation/founding of the Blue Jays. You can find it on Vimeo to rent/buy.

Addendum #2: I figured I'd take Admiral's lead and do a Penumbra-fied version of both the Maple Leafs and Raptors/Huskies (blue/white and purple/red - my preferred look for the team).

It looks fantastic for the Leafs (especially with the '67-'70 design as a base), while performing pretty decently for the Raptors and Huskies. If you think I'm testing the waters for an NHL series, you'd be right.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My first thought was "would the Toronto Giants change their colors to blue and white to match the Maple Leafs?" Then I remembered the Dodgers exist and picked my brain back up off the floor. Incidentally, I like the Raptors stuff here in blue and white, but the more I read about how the Raptors have overwhelmingly become the team of Toronto's young visible minorities, maybe a clean break from the old-line Maple Leafs is in order and they should stick to the Drake colors.

I like Penumbra on the Giants and the old minor-league Maple Leafs hat, but I gotta say, that blue and green Toronto Giants logo looks exactly like what I would expect from the time and place. It looks like a diverse 30-person committee designed it to accomplish about twelve different goals, but none of them very well, and it's appropriately hideous for something which should not be.

The primary logo is my attempt to merge the current "Sox" insignia with the modified version of Badger Light I used on my Project 32Marinersconcept. It's a good way to "Seattle-ify" their 1990 redesign. I also borrowed the teal shade from my Mariners design, pairing it with navy in a co-dominant color scheme. I also used the 1990-present sock logo as a secondary. A navy/kelly version of the Sox's 1976-90 primary logo is a throwback tertiary mark. I figured that the team would consult the same design firm they did in 1976, producing a similar design with the same overused to the point of irritation "modern" Eurostile Extended Black font.

The uniforms combine several White Sox and Mariners traits. The "Sox" insignia is on the home uniform, while the arc-ed "Seattle" wordmark appears on the road uniform (the White Sox have rarely used arched wordmarks, preferring to put "Chicago" on an arc). Block Standard numbers and Rawlings Block NoB's appear on the set, along with the sock patch and simple placket trim. I opted to use teal bills on the cap, as I've always loved that Mariners cap. The socks are the same "dark upper, light middle, white lower" pattern I'm so fond of using on White Sox concepts.

The Senators "Turn Ahead the Clock" uniform are so nauseatingly 90s, they kind of rebound into that territory of awesome.

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can dig the Toronto Giants set..... and the font you used does work well for the Leafs and the Huskies... not sold on it for the Raptors. The great thing about this look is that the orange & black colour scheme is one you wouldn't associate with Toronto, but it works.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

While I can't say I like it, the first Nationals set feels very 90s-tastic. The navy & gold to match the Capitals and Wizards of the time is a good move.

Your Padres-Nats set is a pretty cool idea, though I feel the DC flag and home-plate didn't work super well. I think the tertiary works best.

The Chicago A's are a good combo of Athletics and White Sox. Love the pinstriped home, and the forest green works wonders.

Your Seattle White Sox (SeaSox!) looks really good but it just feels like a good Mariners concept with "Sox" on it. Pinstripes might help. I'm not a big fan of the batterman, but you adapt it well. Love those navy+kelly colors!

Your Toronto set does a good job of combining the Blue Jays and Giants. I can really see this team doing what the Jays have done, with their shift to Canada imagery only away from any local stuff... Totally second your sentiment about losing the Jays identity...

That font looks great for the Raptors! Could we see it on Toronto FC or the Argos, perchance?

I’m a huge fan of the Chicago Athletics look, the simple forest + white color scheme immediately has a classic feel to it that works perfectly.

I’m not entirely sure on how I feel about the Seattle Sox, I will always love that scheme but something seems “missing,” I guess. If you could, I’d love to see how that set would look with striping similar to the real-life Sox away uniforms, like you tried with the Germanic Milwaukee Sox. I feel like that would help put the concept over the top but I would understand if you want to keep the headspoon piping.

The Toronto Giants look great all-around, a pretty perfect blend of the Jays and Giants. Either of those color schemes would be fantastic, black/orange & royal/kelly are two of the best schems out there.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My first thought was "would the Toronto Giants change their colors to blue and white to match the Maple Leafs?" Then I remembered the Dodgers exist and picked my brain back up off the floor. Incidentally, I like the Raptors stuff here in blue and white, but the more I read about how the Raptors have overwhelmingly become the team of Toronto's young visible minorities, maybe a clean break from the old-line Maple Leafs is in order and they should stick to the Drake colors.

I like Penumbra on the Giants and the old minor-league Maple Leafs hat, but I gotta say, that blue and green Toronto Giants logo looks exactly like what I would expect from the time and place. It looks like a diverse 30-person committee designed it to accomplish about twelve different goals, but none of them very well, and it's appropriately hideous for something which should not be.

Thanks! I do think that the Drake colors work for the Raptors, especially since Pittsburgh probably will never get an NBA team and the Pelicans didn't co-brand with the Saints. I'm not sure Penumbra is right for them, as it's doesn't capture the "roughness" of the name. While real raptors were wild turkey-sized feathered reptiles, popular culture will always associate them with fierceness.

I dislike the Toronto Giants' proposed logo, as it's the perfect summation of many of the problems with late-1960s-1970s designs. It's another reason why I'm glad it didn't come to pass. I'm sure some idiots would have nostalgia for it.

On 10/14/2018 at 6:23 PM, Dalcowboyfan92 said:

The Senators "Turn Ahead the Clock" uniform are so nauseatingly 90s, they kind of rebound into that territory of awesome.

Also, that teal "Sox" script; absolutely sexy.

Thanks!

On 10/14/2018 at 7:48 PM, coco1997 said:

I figured the Toronto Giants were up next!

Everything looks great, and I really dig the “What If?” alt. One suggestion: I’d add white outlines to the script and numbers on the road alt for consistency with the rest of the jerseys.

Looking forward to the final stretch of A’s relocations!

Thanks! I wanted to make the "What If?" alt as accurate as possible. I didn't want to put white outlines or white anything on the road alt, because the Giants rarely use white on black alternates. The single-color look "pops" more, IMO. Still, white outlined in orange looks pretty decent.

On 10/15/2018 at 2:30 AM, KittSmith_95 said:

I can dig the Toronto Giants set..... and the font you used does work well for the Leafs and the Huskies... not sold on it for the Raptors. The great thing about this look is that the orange & black colour scheme is one you wouldn't associate with Toronto, but it works.

Thanks!

On 10/15/2018 at 1:06 PM, vtgco said:

Sorry for the delayed response. More excellent work here!

While I can't say I like it, the first Nationals set feels very 90s-tastic. The navy & gold to match the Capitals and Wizards of the time is a good move.

Your Padres-Nats set is a pretty cool idea, though I feel the DC flag and home-plate didn't work super well. I think the tertiary works best.

The Chicago A's are a good combo of Athletics and White Sox. Love the pinstriped home, and the forest green works wonders.

Your Seattle White Sox (SeaSox!) looks really good but it just feels like a good Mariners concept with "Sox" on it. Pinstripes might help. I'm not a big fan of the batterman, but you adapt it well. Love those navy+kelly colors!

Your Toronto set does a good job of combining the Blue Jays and Giants. I can really see this team doing what the Jays have done, with their shift to Canada imagery only away from any local stuff... Totally second your sentiment about losing the Jays identity...

That font looks great for the Raptors! Could we see it on Toronto FC or the Argos, perchance?

That What if logo feels like it's from the Japanese league!

Thank you for your extensive feedback! The Nats-Padres primary was probably not the best design, but I was trying to fill space to mimic the Padres' 2004-2011 logo and establish the tri-star motif. I'll revise it towards the end of the thread.

The SeaSox is pretty much a Mariners concept, but that's the thesis behind it. The White Sox's 90-year identity crisis would lead them towards looking like the Mariners in Seattle. I thought about pinstripes, but they don't really fit with the "modern" look. I don't like the batterman either, but it works well in the new colors.

Penumbra works really well for Toronto FC, but not as much for the Argos.

Blue Toronto FC is a decent look, but I like that they're the outlier in red.

On 10/17/2018 at 1:00 PM, MJD7 said:

I’m a huge fan of the Chicago Athletics look, the simple forest + white color scheme immediately has a classic feel to it that works perfectly.

I’m not entirely sure on how I feel about the Seattle Sox, I will always love that scheme but something seems “missing,” I guess. If you could, I’d love to see how that set would look with striping similar to the real-life Sox away uniforms, like you tried with the Germanic Milwaukee Sox. I feel like that would help put the concept over the top but I would understand if you want to keep the headspoon piping.

The Toronto Giants look great all-around, a pretty perfect blend of the Jays and Giants. Either of those color schemes would be fantastic, black/orange & royal/kelly are two of the best schems out there.

Thanks! I'm glad that the Chicago A's went over as well as they did. I considered the thick trim, but I thought that the thin headspoon trim looked a bit better. It would fit better with the Mariners influence.

The first in the trilogy should be up tonight! Here's a hint: they'd be moving into a baseball stadium most famed for the team that played football there.

I can just picture an identity inspired by the famous “Welcome to Las Vegas” sign using Angels red, gold and sky blue.

I'm probably going to wait to see it play out a bit before committing to it. I doubt anything will come of it, given the TV money involved. @LMUdescribes it here. The stadium rumors aren't as strong as the constant relocation roundelay of the A's and (maybe) the Rays. In the meantime, I'd recommend @MJD7's take on that color scheme for the Angels. He did a fantastic job with it.

Anyway, it's time to unveil the first of the Charlie O.'s last stand!

DENVER ATHLETICS - Go tell it on a mountain!

It's 1977 and Charles Oscar Finley has seen his sports kingdom crumble. He's had to sell the California Golden Seals and the Memphis Tams, while also burning pretty much every bridge he had in the majors. He repeatedly described how Oakland couldn't support a champion teams (a repeat of his dickery from Kansas City), rallied against his players in negotiations (resulting in free agency and trade departures), and fell into debt and further financial difficulties.1 After a last-place finish in '77, Finley was looking to sell the team to anybody who would willingly purchase the club.

Following the Giants' failed attempt to move to Toronto, Finley entered into talks with Denver-based oil tycoon Marvin Davis, who would purchase the team for $12.5 million.2 The team would move to Denver and play at Mile High Stadium. However, complications arose due to the club's $3.25 million lease at the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, dragging the sale process all the way out to the 1979 Winter Meetings. It was due to the constant bickering over the lease agreement (and the issue of the Giants playing games at the Coliseum). The threat of losing the Raiders to Los Angeles strengthened the Coliseum board and Oakland City Council's resolve to refuse the buyout, sinking the deal.3 However, what if the Raiders hadn't threatened to move and the Council finally took their chance to get rid of Finley?4

I figured that the team would follow a similar visual trajectory as the Oakland club, darkening their green and restoring an elephant to the identity. Forest Green works with the scenery, while the Athletic Gold matches both the area's history and vistas. They would briefly undergo a '90s-style phase after moving to Coors Field, adding purple and replacing yellow with metallic gold (albeit with a fairly conservative look, like the NL Rockies). Think the 1998 All-Star Game logo package, albeit with gold instead of silver. The team would course-correct around 2007-2009, bringing back yellow and dumping purple.

The uniforms share many similarities with previous A's concepts I've done, with green/white/green striping and contrast-colored front numbers. The twists include a new striping pattern on the socks (meant to mimic the cap bill and insignia) and an Old English "DENVER" arched wordmark. I figured that a script would emphasize the "D" too much, inviting comparisons to the Tigers that I didn't want.

While the gold alt is pretty standard, the green jersey has a few twists. White outlines appear on the lettering, while my Project 32 Rockies' mountain stripes appear (to mimic the missing primary logo patch). I figured if the Colorado flag could break tincture (a tiny bit), then so could my concept.

The second set of alts includes a tribute to the history of Denver baseball, honoring several iterations of the minor league Bears. The "DA" cap mimics the Old English D on the late-1970s/early-1980s Bears uniforms, while the jersey and pants design mimics the1952DenverBears"strike zone" uniforms. The city name script appears here, as I like the way it looks. The second alt is my attempt to mimic a prospective 1990s purple alternate (same shade as the 1993-2016 Rockies), with a double-outlined insignia/lettering, the appearance of the 1993-94 elephant, and gold trim. It's exactly the kind of conservative '90s uniform design that the Rockies exude.

The dugout jackets feature a few fun touches, such as gold sleeves on the primary. The alternate features a sublimated mountain pattern (a la my Project 32 jacket) and a gradient on the back.

The A's identity works pretty well in Denver, with only a few modifications to make them fit. Of the trilogy, this will probably be the least extreme identity shakeup.

Up next, a far more significant shake-up, one that will earn the ire of the board's font guys!

4 Author's note: I'd like to give a shout out to @Ferdinand Cesarano for finding the articles that laid out the A's potential relocation in this post. That whole thread, especially @Dilbert's megapost, has been a huge boon for this series.

Edited June 8, 2019 by SFGiants58Replaced Image for Alternates, then did a big update